In my article, “Is the ‘Vicious Propensities’ Rule Losing its Bite?”, NYLJ, 2/18/15, I discussed the N.Y. Court of Appeals holding in Hastings v. Suave, 21 N.Y.3d 122 (2013), and its unanticipated departure from its prior decision in Bard v. Jahnke, 6 N.Y.3d 592 (2006), regarding strict liability for personal injuries caused by domestic animals with vicious propensities. In Hastings, a cow wandered off the defendant’s property and collided with the plaintiff’s vehicle on a public highway causing her to sustain injuries. In that case, the court did not apply the theory of strict liability and held “that a landowner or the owner of an animal may be liable under ordinary tort-law principles when a farm animal … is negligently allowed to stray from the property on which the animal is kept.”
‘Hain v. Jamison’: Background
In the recent case Hain v. Jamison, 2016 NY Slip Op. 08583 (Ct. of App., Stein, J.), a calf escaped from the property of defendant Drumm Family Farm, Inc. (Farm) and strayed onto a rural road at night. Plaintiff’s wife exited her vehicle to assist the calf and was struck and killed by an oncoming vehicle. Plaintiff sued on behalf of himself and his decedent wife’s estate, alleging Farm’s negligence in allowing the calf to escape by failing to maintain a fence and not restraining or retrieving the animal. Plaintiff also sued the driver of the other vehicle for her negligence in operating it and her husband as owner (Jamison).
